BVRAAM became a requirement (I think in 1996 or so) for FC-1 (now JF-17) after India selected SU-30. FC-20 avionics would be chosen keeping in mind the Indian acquisitions/plans. And I do think that PAF would like to equip FC-20 with an AESA right from the start, though where that AESA would come from is anyone's guess for the time being. Depending on who wins the MMRCA competition, I think the competition would be between the europeans & China, just as is the case for the second batch of JF-17.

And Su-30MKI which India already has, is as dangerous as any MRCA candidate. So India's choice of MRCA is meaningless.

If PAF can handle Su-30MKI, then it can handle any MRCA. If PAF cannot handle Su-30MKI, then we're in trouble anyway, regardless of what MRCA is chosen. India plans to get 250 Su-30MKI and only 126 MRCA.

And yes, I think J-10B can handle Su-30MKI and any MRCA. But the Block 52 F-16's and J-10's cannot. Unless we get a good AWACS network. Then even JF-17 can handle them.

And Su-30MKI which India already has, is as dangerous as any MRCA candidate. So India's choice of MRCA is meaningless.

If PAF can handle Su-30MKI, then it can handle any MRCA. If PAF cannot handle Su-30MKI, then we're in trouble anyway, regardless of what MRCA is chosen. India plans to get 250 Su-30MKI and only 126 MRCA.

And yes, I think J-10B can handle Su-30MKI and any MRCA. But the Block 52 F-16's and J-10's cannot. Unless we get a good AWACS network. Then even JF-17 can handle them.

Londo, I have to disagree with you on this one. Any MMRCA winner (especially if its a western one), in my opinion, would be way more dangerous than any MKI that IAF currently has. Why do I say this?

Well, take a look at their MKI fleet. The MKI contract was signed back in mid 90s, and technologies were developed and incorporated into it throuought the 90s and early 2000s. No doubt MKI has served IAF well, and IAF seems to hold it in very high regards. Of the top of my head, so far they have ordered around 230 machines and also got the production line with ToT. The whole thing thus far (if Im not mistaken) has cost them around $8.5 billion.

Now take a look at MMRCA competition. MMRCA would only be introduced around 2013/14 timeframe, and hence it would have a 10-15 years technological edge over MKI. The value of the contract is estimated to be around $10-12 billion, and this might even go higher. The number of units is 125 (almost half of MKI units). I know the fighter prices have been going up, but India is no stupid. This much money for this many units is disproportionately high vis-a-vis MKI, and India would not have been willing to pay so much money, unless they knew that they would get their value for the money. MMRCA would bring to India that they have not have had via MKI. If the purpose was only to fill the fighter gap that the retirement of their old fighters is causing, they would have gone for M2K line or a single seater MKI (as was proposed) or simpler Mig-35, and the whole thing would have been much quicker & cheaper.

Finally, Indians know they can take on Pakistan anytime, whether the latter has J-10B or blk 52+. They would have both the quantitative & the qualitative edges. Pakistan could only hope that its assets would be enough to make the war very costly to India, and hence act as a deterrant. India's eyes are focused on China now and not Pakistan (and in the long run both of them together), and this is where MMRCA fits in.

But when I look at all the MRCA candidates, none of them seem significantly better than Su-30MKI, at least on paper.

The Superhornets and Eurofighters seem to be the most capable contenders, and I don't think a few squadron of either fighter can help India crack China's air defense.

I always thought they just wanted western fighters so they could have joint exercises and standards with NATO, and become capable of using western precision weapons which are incompatible with most of their current fleet. Also improve InAF morale due to flying coffins, and alleviate the inferior reputation of Russian fighters.

But I could be wrong and Su-30MKI could be actually lacking compared to these new aircraft. In which case it seems the Indians have exaggerated the capabilities of MKI and the confidence that they have in it.

Same like israel,They never buy standard models they always want some thing special as far as they needs are concerned.

J-10B surely will offer to PAF, it's in the process. And China govenment will offer the loan to support PAK to acquire as soon as possible. Indeed , China usually can't sell her best weapon to other country to strictly guard the state secret. however, all chinese knew that our brother PAK is an exception. We are willing to help our ally who always stand with us in the past several tens of year .Our cooperation in either political or economical fields are still wide and bright in future. So not only J-10B, even for 4 gen fighter aircraft, China will also share with PAK in due course.

But when I look at all the MRCA candidates, none of them seem significantly better than Su-30MKI, at least on paper.

The Superhornets and Eurofighters seem to be the most capable contenders, and I don't think a few squadron of either fighter can help India crack China's air defense.

I always thought they just wanted western fighters so they could have joint exercises and standards with NATO, and become capable of using western precision weapons which are incompatible with most of their current fleet. Also improve InAF morale due to flying coffins, and alleviate the inferior reputation of Russian fighters.

But I could be wrong and Su-30MKI could be actually lacking compared to these new aircraft. In which case it seems the Indians have exaggerated the capabilities of MKI and the confidence that they have in it.

How good is MKI, well that's a matter of opinion. If You ask a Indian, he/she would probably put it 'only' below F-22 and above everything else. If you ask a Pakistani or Chinese, they would put it on par or may be only slightly above something MKM. It's up to an individual to decide.

In my personal opinion, it is a good machine. Its better than anything currently in Pakistani & chinese aiforces. No doubt about it. But if it was above everything else on the planet bar F-22 (as many make it out to be), then Im sorry it just does not cut it. Through MKI, Indians have shown what could be achieved through mating/mixing/integrating different technologies. It was their concept and they got the results. Mating western/Israeli/Russian tech was not all that expensive either as it is normally claimed that MKI costs around $35 mil. However, if the concept was as successful or as cheap as it is claimed by many on various fora, why on earth are they willing to pay almost twice as much for MMRCA winner? Why couldn't they just follow the very same approach, i.e. get a Russian airframe and mate it with all the latest technologies from west/Israel, and get the best of both world, i.e. a machine as good as MMRCA and much cheaper? They have already shown it works ones, so why shy away from it now? One possible answer is that west won't sell their very advanced technologies unless India is willing to pay for the whole package, and Indians think its worth the price.

Beggars can't be choosers. We can't rely on China. Their genetics is not close to ours.

Genetics is only a Physical factor, you should not ignore the Psychological factor. It's the deep emotion between Chinese and Pakistani. Who is worthy to work with, we have learned it from the history.

It is the soldier, not the reporter who has given us the freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.

The war is not fought on comparison basis it is on scnario basis like the support of radars, awacs, sams and then it come the fighter jets capabilities and of course training of the fighter pillot . Mistake or a delay in response make a hell of difference in result .

Londo, I have to disagree with you on this one. Any MMRCA winner (especially if its a western one), in my opinion, would be way more dangerous than any MKI that IAF currently has. Why do I say this?

Well, take a look at their MKI fleet. The MKI contract was signed back in mid 90s, and technologies were developed and incorporated into it throuought the 90s and early 2000s. No doubt MKI has served IAF well, and IAF seems to hold it in very high regards. Of the top of my head, so far they have ordered around 230 machines and also got the production line with ToT. The whole thing thus far (if Im not mistaken) has cost them around $8.5 billion.

Now take a look at MMRCA competition. MMRCA would only be introduced around 2013/14 timeframe, and hence it would have a 10-15 years technological edge over MKI. The value of the contract is estimated to be around $10-12 billion, and this might even go higher. The number of units is 125 (almost half of MKI units). I know the fighter prices have been going up, but India is no stupid. This much money for this many units is disproportionately high vis-a-vis MKI, and India would not have been willing to pay so much money, unless they knew that they would get their value for the money. MMRCA would bring to India that they have not have had via MKI. If the purpose was only to fill the fighter gap that the retirement of their old fighters is causing, they would have gone for M2K line or a single seater MKI (as was proposed) or simpler Mig-35, and the whole thing would have been much quicker & cheaper.

Finally, Indians know they can take on Pakistan anytime, whether the latter has J-10B or blk 52+. They would have both the quantitative & the qualitative edges. Pakistan could only hope that its assets would be enough to make the war very costly to India, and hence act as a deterrant. India's eyes are focused on China now and not Pakistan (and in the long run both of them together), and this is where MMRCA fits in.

I tend to disagree here, since we all have been following both InAF and PAF acquisition plans for long it was transpired to me atleast that the MRCA competition came out of no where. A few years back they were touting the SU-30MKI to be superior to anything in the world going to the extent to comparing with the F-22 Raptor, however, the same Indians are now evaluating the very aircraft they claimed were inferior to the Flanker !

My observation is that basically the InAF found the LCA to be an utter disappointment coupled with the fact that their fleet of Mig-21sand Mig-23s was dwindling faster than they had envisaged.....whereas Pakistan had already embarked upon and test flown a multirole fighter (JF-17) therefore in a desperate move the InAF pressed hard for more acquisition. Had the MRCA been a "technological quantum leap", then the InAF would had opted for F-35 JSF FULL STOP ! The Americans would had been pleased to release the type to India given the price the Indians readied in the form of controlled nuclear sites under the controversial civilian nuclear deal !

By the time the Indians would be even half way inducting the MRCA....the JSF will be making headlines of record breaking combat and operational performances in conflicts with airforces of USA, Israel, Turkey, Australia, Austria, UK ! by that time (read around 2015-18) the F-35 would have been ordered by UAE, Singapore, South Korea maybe Egypt too !

The capabilities offered by the MRCA contenders will be available in the market in the next 5 to 7 years and can be incorporated in our F-16C/Ds not to mention the unprecedented growth of the Chinese military aviation technology that will bear fruit in form of FC-20 ! Even the SU-30s and M2Ks can be upgraded to incorporate the MRCA technologies

India cannot take over Pakistan anywhere anytime as claimed in your post...........air war is a complex phenomenon......only sheer numbers and quality cannot secure a war in your favour............PAF is very deceptive, hard hitting and intelligent airforce which does'nt expose much..........recently it has acquired some new capabilities that have become a pain in ass for the InAF wargamers.......the AEWs, BVRs, AA Refuellers, MRCA F-16s, Cruise missiles to mention a few have dynamically changed the spectre of air warfare in South Asia !

The InAF is crying that it will lose the quantitative edge over Pakistan.........China is not even mentioned.........PAF with 400 fighter planes (100 F-16s, Mirages, JF-17s and F-7s each in 2012) will be a tough fighting force not to mention the Fierce Dragon sharpening its claws ! Similarly as Pakistan comes out of its financial woes, I am sure it will exercise its option for 18 F-16C/Ds after having spent so much on the types induction and logistical support.

For the first time in Indo Pak history I feel the InAF is feeling the pressure ! It has to keep a 3:1 edge over PAF in every faculty of airwarfare whereas PAF is cosy waiting for JF-17s, F-16s and FC-20s while its Mirages and F-7s are in pretty good shape to serve it well through the induction of Thunders, Vipers and Dragons in the next 10 years!

To my earlier post I would like to add that the Indians have contradicted their own statements regarding LCA and MKI. Throughout the last 10 years they have compared LCA with F-16, F-18 , M2Ks and claimed it to be superior to all these western veterans.

On the other hand their SU-30MKI was beating the F-15Es, F-16s and F-18s all over their pipe dreams. It was claimed to have cut the Rafale.short.......as one InAF Chief said "Rafale is just as good as SU-30MKI but cannot be bought in adequate battlefield numbers" Now why the hell are they evaluating the Rafale ...........implying that the much touted SU-30 has not performed up to their rhetoric !

If it was to counter J-10s and F-16s of PAF, India could had easily inducted another 50-80 SU-30/35MKIs of equal or superior capabilities. My point is very clear......indians have failed in developing the LCA into a truly operational multi role light weight fighter and therefore its airforce has said to the DRDO "enough is enough" and started trials of advanced multirole fighters under the garb of "MRCA".

And in order to prevent the superfacial Indian pride associated with the LCA since 1983.........these fighters will be inducted in token numbers i.e. 220............way down from the initial requirement of 400 plus (to replace Mig-21/23s). on the other hand PAF's order for JF-17 has jumped from 150 to 250 and now figure of 300 is being quoted in defense circles.

And in order to prevent the superfacial Indian pride associated with the LCA since 1983.........these fighters will be inducted in token numbers i.e. 220............way down from the initial requirement of 400 plus (to replace Mig-21/23s). on the other hand PAF's order for JF-17 has jumped from 150 to 250 and now figure of 300 is being quoted in defense circles.

I think you are exaggerating the numbers too much. I suppose even 100 would be a very big number.

"Beauty is in the Eye of the Beholder"

"We are a Nation with our own Distinctive Culture and Civilization, Language and Literature, Art and Architecture, Names and Nomenclature, Sense of Values and Proportion, Legal Laws and Moral Code, Customs and Calandar, History and Tradition, Aptitudes and Ambitions; in short, we have our own Distinctive Outlook on Life and of Life. By all Canons of International Law, We are a Nation". (Quaid-e-Azam) Mohammad Ali Jinnah in one of his letters to Mohandas Karamchand (Mahatma) Gandhi.

Theirs not to make reply,Theirs not to reason why,Theirs but to do and die,

worrior dear please correct the spellings which is wa r r i e r, and not worrier.... ok with this solved, so what were you saying about the wings of JF17, borrowed from f-7???? wow what a reavelation!!!! Like I said, please first learn to spell warrier right... sorry I am not being sarcastic, but can you please think before you ink!!!

QUOTE (PakiWorrior @ Nov 11 2009, 12:42 AM)

I have question if J-10 is generation 3.5 or 4 plane then what about JF-17. As far I can see the JF-17 wings are not so greatly designed, probably borrowed from F-7.

What the crap are u talking about Mr scientist wannabe, about genetics and all this crap, you sure wokeup on the wrong side of bed, dude, China would have already given us deliveries from thier own stock in the hour of need what a petty steet guy like yourself would know, sorry for the harsh words but I am trying to control my anger at your mismanaged statement please go back to sleep

QUOTE (pirateofthecarribean @ Nov 11 2009, 11:24 AM)

It is my understanding that the J-10B's airframe is more advanced, with DSI etc. I'm not surprised, the Chinese never sell us their best, only their second-rate. They only waited till now to sell us J-10A AFTER they are sure they have their own better J-10B. http://www.sinodefen...ighter/j10b.asp

J-10B has a modified nose to fit an AESA. J-10A cannot fit an AESA with its rounder nose. Furthermore, J-10B has IRST and so it can search and track silently.

To my earlier post I would like to add that the Indians have contradicted their own statements regarding LCA and MKI. Throughout the last 10 years they have compared LCA with F-16, F-18 , M2Ks and claimed it to be superior to all these western veterans.

On the other hand their SU-30MKI was beating the F-15Es, F-16s and F-18s all over their pipe dreams. It was claimed to have cut the Rafale.short.......as one InAF Chief said "Rafale is just as good as SU-30MKI but cannot be bought in adequate battlefield numbers" Now why the hell are they evaluating the Rafale ...........implying that the much touted SU-30 has not performed up to their rhetoric !

If it was to counter J-10s and F-16s of PAF, India could had easily inducted another 50-80 SU-30/35MKIs of equal or superior capabilities. My point is very clear......indians have failed in developing the LCA into a truly operational multi role light weight fighter and therefore its airforce has said to the DRDO "enough is enough" and started trials of advanced multirole fighters under the garb of "MRCA".

And in order to prevent the superfacial Indian pride associated with the LCA since 1983.........these fighters will be inducted in token numbers i.e. 220............way down from the initial requirement of 400 plus (to replace Mig-21/23s). on the other hand PAF's order for JF-17 has jumped from 150 to 250 and now figure of 300 is being quoted in defense circles.

According to Indians, LCA was supposed to be at least as capable as Eurofighter. The results of LCA project are well below the expectations. Due to this reason Indians are forced to look at the other options. They could resolve this problem simply by inducting 120 more MKI. In that case Indian Air force would be comprised of mainly Russian made fighters (Su-30 MKI + Mig-29 ) with French (Mirage) and few Indian (LCA).

But they want to diversify their inventory, Even if none of the MMRCA candidate is far superior to MKI. Plus they will also get their hands on the top western technology in the form of Radar and Engine.

Logistically Mig-35 seems to be the best candidate for MMRCA but I am sure they will not going to buy it, since it is from Russia.

I agree with the statement that if we will be able counter MKI then we will have no problem in countring MMRCA as well.

December 29, 2006, China's Jian-10 was first announced. As early as 2001, the Chinese government began to develop F-10 carrier-based, after eight years of research, F-10 carrier-based launch of the last. From R & D speed of speaking, China's slower, developed J-10 use for 12 years, developed carrier-based F-10 actually took eight years. This shows that China's carrier-based aircraft technology is almost from scratch.

Plug-in 11 (5 under the fuselage, each wing the next three), the largest external fuel tanks 4100 liters (1500 × 2,1100 × 1)

These data indicate that F-10 carrier-based F-10 package type is almost identical, but thrust from 122 kN to 152 kN, roll distances have been shortened to 50 meters only. Like with the F-10, F-10 carrier-based addition to maintaining the normal level flight, there are enough thrust to meet the needs of the implementation of a variety of motor actions, so that the level of acceleration, climbing, circling, etc. have a larger performance increase, even in the air combat mode effortlessly vertically upwards.

In fact, Jian Shi on China's development of carrier-based aircraft several years ago had been an open secret.

Statistics show that China's military aircraft have been delivered in many parts, such as the Harbin Bearing Group, developed ship bearing, developed by Harbin Boiler Factory boiler accessories, Anshan Steel and Baoshan Iron & Steel developed special ship plate, etc., but the core of an aircraft carrier - ship body of research situations is not clear, however, carrier-based aircraft are being developed, and the supporting ships, submarines have been started.

Specifications for the aircraft carrier, the outside world is estimated that there are two kinds of programs are ranked 48,000 tons standard, full row of 60 thousand tons, catapult take-off of about 50 carrier aircraft, the only difference is that nuclear-powered or conventionally powered.

According to the Chinese aircraft carrier the most likely displacement, China should adopt self-developed F -10 as a carrier-based aircraft carrier-based. Information that China's indigenously developed light combat aircraft F -10 fighter for the use of the former edge of the triangular canard wing layouts. The rise and fall of structure in the design of the aircraft beginning to consider the future apply to the use of carrier aircraft, so landing the aircraft structural design of a very complex carrier-based aircraft used. In addition, the F-span of only -10 Su -33 70%. No folding wing can carry into the aircraft carrier.

Earlier this year in the total ship at a press conference, spokesman Tao Huang had said: "China has the ability to manufacture an aircraft carrier, but when a specific manufacturer has not yet determined." In a short time later, China's National People's Congress People's Liberation Army a delegation will be revealed, as far as he knows the current aircraft development has progressed smoothly, if fast, then there may be completed by 2010. His remark brought out the quartet. In response, China's cross-ministry spokesman Qin Gang did not deny that he only said that China has a vast territorial seas, to defend the country's maritime security and maintaining territorial sovereignty and maritime rights and interests is the sacred duty of the Chinese armed forces. China will combine all factors relevant to seriously study and consider the relevant issues.

The Chinese military, "Liberation Army Daily" has recently reported on an aircraft carrier up more gradually, has recently published an article also pointed out China-made aircraft carrier of the seven problems, these key technologies include: steam catapult to block cable and large lifts.

When China develops its Aircraft Carriers, it would be interesting to see how Gwadar, Ormara and Pasni ports are utilized and if there would be a possibility that Pakistan Navy establishes Naval Bases in Pasni and Gwardar. Presence of Chinese Aircraft Carriers with J-10s on them would certainly be intimidating for the enemy (india)!

........ when the first drop of a Munafiq's blood drops in the Kaa'bah ........

........ the Black Flags Army shall rise from Khurasan and commence its earth rumbling march toward Damishque. Any force that tries to come in its path, shall be destroyed with ruthless destruction. Awaiting, upon reaching Damishque, the safron and beads of pearls and the Black Turban that shall lead the Salah of Fajr .........

........ the stones and trees of Lud shall cry out to the Black Flags and tell them of the Munafiqs, Yahuds and Kuffar that are hiding behind them, to come and kill them. That day shall be the day of reckoning, the day of justice, the day when no power shall hold and unfair advantage. The battle shall be fought and won by way of faith ........

My only worry /concern is that J10 is a single engined aircraft. These aircrafts are traditionally not used as carrier based fighters. So these are either demonstrating capability, and closer to the time PLAAF will acquire a J11 variant for the role. A more interesting scenario is whether J10 would be developed as a double engined fighter specifically for carrier use. I think although interesting, the latter is likely to be financially prohibitive, unless we are looking at a fifth generation fighter to take up this role. Again it is too far in the future to see and predict. The most likely is a J11/SU family varient.WaSalamAraz

I don't think there is any talk of naval J-10. China is moving ahead with J-15 for its carriers. It is a twin-engined design based on flanker. It has been photographed under mothball on the dry varyag reproduction testing base.

I don't think there is any talk of naval J-10. China is moving ahead with J-15 for its carriers. It is a twin-engined design based on flanker. It has been photographed under mothball on the dry varyag reproduction testing base.

I think this is more close to the realityand probably the right analysis.there was talk of PLAAF buying SU33 for ship based use but I guess they have something else up their sleeves and the talk has died down.Araz

Feb issue of Combat Aircraft has a news report in it saying Pakistan has 'reportedly' signed a memorandum to procure 36 J10B's equipped with X band AESA, Flanker style IRST, rear facing MAWS and new ECM housing on the fin.

Feb issue of Combat Aircraft has a news report in it saying Pakistan has 'reportedly' signed a memorandum to procure 36 J10B's equipped with X band AESA, Flanker style IRST, rear facing MAWS and new ECM housing on the fin.

I doubt that FC20/J10B will be delivered before 2014. Maybe we get 20 J10A for getting the experience. Those planes could be delivered first quarter 2011. According to introduction dates it would be the next plane to be introduced after the Block52.

I doubt that FC20/J10B will be delivered before 2014. Maybe we get 20 J10A for getting the experience. Those planes could be delivered first quarter 2011. According to introduction dates it would be the next plane to be introduced after the Block52.

Recently, the U.S. think tank, International Assessment and Strategy Center, published an article about the Chinese J-10 fighter. The article claimed that the J-10 fighter is about to enter the international market after 2010, while its price tag of 40 million U.S. dollars is half of its U.S. counterpart, the F-16 fighter.

According to the article, the J-10 fighter is going to sell on the international weapons market around 2010 after extensive R&D and equipping of the Chinese Air Force is complete. It is understood that the Chinese Air Force started developing J-10 back in the 1960s, and it has been fully equipped for the last five years.

The progress that China has made in developing the engine makes the fighter very competitive on international markets; while with its good quality electronics and weapon systems, the price is just half of an American F-16. Pakistan is sure to be the first buyer, and many countries including Iran and the Philippines are also planning to introduce the fighter.

According to Pakistani sources, Pakistan has already reached an agreement with China to buy 36 J-10 fighters at a total value of 1.4 billion U.S. dollars. While the single price for an F-16, which U.S. sold to the UAE affiliated with AN/APG-80 radar, was 80 million U.S dollars. At the moment it is unclear whether spare parts, maintenance support, training and other services are included into the J-10's price. It is estimated that Pakistan might buy 70 to 150 J-10 fighters in all.

J-10 fighter is performing in the air

Besides price, what makes the J-10 attractive is its competitive electronics and weapon systems. The latest version, sometimes called the J-10B (or FC-20 when slated for Pakistan) emerged in Internet photos in January 2009. It features a driverless supersonic inlet similar in principle to that of the Joint Strike Fighter. The nose is redesigned, with an infrared search-and-track system in front of the windscreen and what appears to be a canted radar bulkhead consisting of a fixed, electronically scanned array radar. If true, this would be a major advance for China's radar technology, and may make the J-10 competitive with upgraded Western and Russian fourth-generation-plus fighters. The cockpit is dominated by three multifunction displays and a heads-up display.

The J-10 has 11 hardpoints, including five on the fuselage. Its principal counter-air weapon is the Luoyang PL 12 active radar-guided air-to-air missile (AAM) with 70-km. range. With a twin-AAM pylon on the inner wing mount, plus two on forward fuselage mounts, the J-10 can carry eight PL-12s. Short-range AAMs include the PL-8, a copy of the Israeli Python-3, and an improved version of this missile, the PL-9, both helmet-sighted. The J-10 may soon feature a more capable helmet-mounted display and a new fifth-generation AAM from Luoyang.

The fighter's market success will depend on China's ability to produce reliable advanced turbofan engines. Rival fighter maker Shenyang has been developing its WS-10A Taihang turbofan since the mid-1980s, which could offer 13.2 tons of thrust. Russian sources believe it is beset by developmental difficulties.

Chengdu may have a competing Huashan advanced turbofan engine program, which some Chinese sources note is based on its late-1990s acquisition of the engineering data and sales rights to the Tumansky R-79 turbofan developed for the defunct Yakovlev Yak-141 supersonic vertical/short-takeoff-and-landing fighter. Nevertheless, Russian sources say China remains interested in more powerful versions of the Salyut AL-31FN, which could come in 13.5- and, eventually, 15-ton-thrust versions.

Chengdu remains ready to develop a carrier-based version of the J-10. During the PLAAF anniversary, a test pilot was reported noting that ground-test simulations prove the J-10 can operate from a carrier.

J-10's BVR performance is pretty much the same as F-16C, so its quite good enough for PAF. Its KLJ-10 slotted array radar can track 10 targets while simultaneously engaging 4 with PL-12/SD-10 missiles. I don't know how many targets in total it can detect, 40? And I don't know what the radar's range is... Jane's says 75km for 3sqm target (i.e. a flanker) but that may be conservative The missiles themselves have at least 80km range, which is greater than the AMRAAMS that we are buying from the US and putting on our F-16's. By the time we have J-10's, we'll also have our AWACS and datalink working, so it will become even more stealthy and deadly with BVR.

If we somehow get the J-10B version, then that's even better since it has an ESA radar which has a tonne of more advantages (stealthier, more targets, more range). Also keep an eye out for China's new super long range AAM's (150km+) which may finish development by the time we get our J-10's delivered.

Thankfully Kayani is much smarter than you and understands that democracy is the right way forward. The problem with Pakistan so far has not been democracy, but rather a lack of accountability for leaders, regardless of their source: civil or army. Mash'Allah now Pakistan has many checks and balances in place, such as independent judiciary and media, so corrupt and bad elements in government are automatically being plucked out every day, slowly but surely. And the army is providing a check as well, a superb job by Kayani so far. As long as he doesn't try to take over himself, he's doing the country a great service. He's too patriotic to do something like that.

I would rather love to acknolwedge you ... that "Khilafat" is a fate of Pakistan and INSHALLAH it will be sonner or later ... so called democracy or british judiciary sytem cannot serve Pakistan or Pakistani nation...we have to rid over that hypocrite "Democracy"...we cannot survive without KHILAFAT.